[Leica] WAS WAS Re: Why M is so popular? NOW MIRO R!

[Ted Grant <tedgrant@home.com>]

Miro Jurcevic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> One of my points was that dealers kept the prices high, never
did CLA, and based the
> notion of condition and value on the quality of the cosmetic impression. <<<<<<<<<<

Miro old chap,
It would appear from your posts that you have a greater quarrel with the
dealers methods of pricing than a malfunctioning Leica R camera .  As
you state:   >>> the dealers kept the prices high, never did CLA, and
based the  notion of condition and value on the quality of the cosmetic
impression. <<<<<

And this being the case, are you not annoyed at that tactic, certainly
when you're attempting to buy a "cheaply priced used R?"  Yet you
continue to whip a dead horse that the R cameras are rubbish!  It would
seem maybe you have your whipping cane aimed in the wrong direction and
should be beating on the unscrupulous dealers instead of blaming the camera.

Or am I reading many of your posts wrong on this topic?  Which by the
way, has absolutely  nothing to do with the M camera so I've changed the
topic heading as you can see..
 
> The significance of my assertion is on a sample of 15. Therefore the chances
> that I am totally wrong is very low. Of course, my sample excludes any
> cameras that cost the same price used as a new one.<<<<<<

But then are you not defeating the whole purpose of trying to find a
good condition camera? 

I mean if you look at a beater Ford or Mercedes and neither are anything
more than semi-wrecks running on a couple of cylinders, does that mean
all the rest of the models are wrecks?  It would appear that's what
you're doing with the R cameras!  Is it not?

Quite frankly even though we,  generally the whole crew here,  do our
utmost to be helpful to what appears a problem for another LUG member, I
would say some of us are becoming a tad exasperated with your approach
to your R camera assessment of complete negativism. 

In my opinion, as humble as it can be, I feel you are unjustly beating
on this very well made camera system, that has served many of us
extremely well since they appeared on the market. It appears you
"protest too much" with no real time using the camera system from a "new
one" well using it for several months or years.

It's OK to have a bad ass attitude about a product one has worked hard,
had it fail on many occasions and lots of experience to make totally
negative comments. I have no problem with that! However, in your case
you've admitted never owning an R camera of any model, but you come down
on the system as though you had many years of hard time with one in hand.

Sorry my friend your put down of the R camera system just doesn't wash
any longer. When you've put time in working one hard come see us, we may
well want to read your posts once again.

Thank you,
ted





> 
> > That is not to say the R cameras are problem-free. But claiming that such
> a
> > large proportion of R cameras produced is defective sounds absurd to me.
> It
> > just doesn't make much economic sense. All I can say is, in all
> likelihood,
> > some (i.e. Miro) have been relatively unlucky with the Rs. Small sample
> > error, I presume.